Preview — A History of Fascism, 1914-1945
by Stanley G. Payne

A History of Fascism, 1914-1945

This is the first full history of fascism - as a force and as a phenomenon - in Europe and elsewhere between the world wars. This history encompasses all the major fascist movements, as well as other forms of authoritarian nationalism, and provides in-depth analyses of these movements, the interpretative problems they pose, and previous interpretations of them. Stanley G.This is the first full history of fascism - as a force and as a phenomenon - in Europe and elsewhere between the world wars. This history encompasses all the major fascist movements, as well as other forms of authoritarian nationalism, and provides in-depth analyses of these movements, the interpretative problems they pose, and previous interpretations of them. Stanley G. Payne interprets fascism as a form of revolutionary ultranationalism - a program for national rebirth based on a primarily vitalist philosophy, extreme elitism, mass mobilization, the promotion of violence, and military virtues. He traces this phenomenon through the history of ideas, previous political movements, and the events of World War I. Though his focus is chiefly on Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, he also gives detailed attention to the Romanian Iron Guard, Franco's Spain, Japan, and protofascist movements around the globe. In view of widespread speculation about the return of fascism to Europe and the Afro-Asian World, this work is especially timely. However, Payne presents a powerful case for viewing fascism as a unique "epochal phenomenon." Conversely, he treats significant individual features of fascism as inherent aspects of revolutionary movements and nationalist dictatorships, with every likelihood of reappearing in new and different forms....more

Community Reviews

Not as good as Paxton, imo. But a very solid, thorough review of a large mass of material. Payne occasionally does give way to some social science jargon --, which Paxton really never does. Still, it is really the best single-volume 'history' of the topic (whereas Paxton is more topical and analytical).

The last several years have seen a "Brown Scare" of sorts, where college students and sophisticated city dwellers have started seeing "Fascists" everywhere, although, in fact, fascism was eliminated in 1945 in a decisive war, after which it has retreated to the margins. In contrast, Communism was one of the victors in that war and came out of the war with enhancedA History of Fascism: 1914-1945 by Stanley Payne

The last several years have seen a "Brown Scare" of sorts, where college students and sophisticated city dwellers have started seeing "Fascists" everywhere, although, in fact, fascism was eliminated in 1945 in a decisive war, after which it has retreated to the margins. In contrast, Communism was one of the victors in that war and came out of the war with enhanced prestige. Nonetheless, although Communism had the support of powerful nations, the suggestion that there are Communists or Communist-supporters anywhere is met with skepticism.

Of course, the claims that there are fascists is a politically-motivated charge that plays on emotions rather than reason. The people charged with being Fascists are in no way Fascists, but the stigma associated with Fascism is effective in smearing the recipients of the charge.

So what is fascism and how does one know how to identify a fascist if one meets one?

A History of Fascism: 1914-1945 by Stanley Payne may be the definitive book on fascism. Payne dissects the history of Fascism on a country by country basis for the period 1914 through 1945 through a survey of the nations of Europe, South America and Asia. The results of this survey are often surprising; I had thought that most Eastern European countries were Fascist in the 1930s. In fact, those countries were generally able to suppress their fascist movements, until those countries received help from Germany.

The first thing that Payne discusses is the definition of fascism. It turns out that defining fascism is not easy. Fascism did not have a central text or originating philosopher. Payne affirms that fascism did have a philosophical core, although its tenets were eclectic. Often, fascism was defined in negative terms, but its characteristics included ultranationalism, a desire for a national rebirth, and a revolutionary rejection of traditional authority structures. Fascism was generally secular, anti-liberal, anti-Marxist, and anti-conservative. Payne explains:

"Fundamental to fascism was the effort to create a new “civic religion” of the movement and of its structure as a state. This would build a system of all-encompassing myths that would incorporate both the fascist elite and their followers and would bind together the nation in a new common faith and loyalty. Such civic religion would displace preceding structures of belief and relegate supernatural religion to a secondary role, or to none at all. This orientation has sometimes been called political religion, but, though there were specific examples of religious or would-be “Christian fascists,” fascism basically presupposed a post-Christian, postreligious, secular, and immanent frame of reference. Its own myth of secular transcendance could earn adherents only in the absence or weakness of traditional concepts of spiritual and otherworldly transcendance, for fascism sought to re-create nonrationalist myth structures for those who had lost or rejected a traditional mythic framework. Ideologically and politically, fascism could be successful only to the extent that such a situation existed."

Fascism emerged out of the left. Mussolini was originally a leftist and fascism grew out of the leftist radical syndicalist movement. Payne explains:

"The nucleus that eventually founded Fascism in Italy did not, however, stem either from the cultural elite or from the right-wing nationalists, but from the transformation of part of the revolutionary left, particularly the sector known as revolutionary syndicalists. Revolutionary syndicalism originated in France early in the 1890s, as a reaction against the weakness and moderation of socialism and the trade union movement. It sought to overcome such limitations through “direct action” or what its proponents termed la manière force (the tactics of force), with the goal of achieving revolution through a grand general strike that would make it possible to restructure society around the syndicates (trade unions). Revolutionary syndicalists detested reformism, compromise, and parliamentary government, or what they called “the superstitious belief in majorities.” They were more influenced than most socialists by the cultural crisis of the fin de siècle, particularly by Social Darwinism, the importance of group conflict, and Sorelian ideas about the moral value of violence. In France their apogee occurred in 1902– 6, after which their influence quickly waned."

Fascists split from the left over the issue of World War I, which the proto-fascists viewed in a positive light as being restorative of the nation.

In Germany, the Nazis called each other "comrade" and adopted red flags, the color of the left.

Fascism was not inherently racist. German National Socialists were racist, but Italian Fascism was not. Italian Fascism defined "Italian" as including Jews and another group who claimed or participated in Italian culture.

Violence was common to both fascism and communism, with fascism tending to glorify violence in the abstract:

"Equally if not more important was the positive evaluation of violence and struggle in fascist doctrine. All revolutionary mass movements have initiated and practiced violence to a greater or lesser degree, and it is probably impossible to carry violence to greater lengths than have some Leninist regimes, practitioners of, in the words of one Old Bolshevik, “infinite compulsion.” The only unique feature of the fascist relationship to violence was the theoretical evaluation by many fascist movements that violence possessed a certain positive and therapeutic value in and of itself, that a certain amount of continuing violent struggle, along the lines of Sorelianism and extreme Social Darwinism, was necessary for the health of national society."

In discussing the success of fascism in the European context in the 1930s, Payne noted that democracy was essential to fascism victory. Where Fascism came to power, it came to power through the electoral system rather than through a violent revolution. On the other hand, democracy could block the development of fascism. In discussing the failure of the Arrow Cross movement in Hungary, Payne notes:

"The elections nonetheless produced a stalemate for the Arrow Cross. The government remained fully in control, and Teleki was a prime minister undisposed to experiment with the right radical ploys of Daranyi and Imredy. Governmental power was fully entrenched in most rural areas and small towns as well, while the upper-class Hungarian senate was now given more voice by the government to counter the presence of the national socialists in the lower house. Szalasi himself would remain in prison until the following year, and though there was a certain amount of street disorder in Budapest and the larger cities during 1939– 40, he had set the Arrow Cross on the legal road to power. That road was now effectively blocked by a semiauthoritarian government. In Hungary, as in Austria, Romania, and elsewhere, the lack of political democracy would be decisive in blocking the political success of a large, broad-based, and popular fascist movement, one that in 1939 could rival the Nazi Party of seven years earlier in proportionate popular support. With access effectively controlled by a nondemocratic government, the Arrow Cross would have to await foreign intervention or military defeat to have an opportunity to seize power."

This an encyclopedic book that captivates and persuades by its details. It is good history and a useful source of information.

I had to read this book for my comprehensive exams (aka prelims). While the introductions to fascism in various countries were useful, what I really appreciated was the attempt to link various movements together into one group. What is 'fascism' if you try to define it beyond Italy? Can one speak of a generic version of fascism? What is fascism? The later chapters of this book go a long way to answering these questions, and thus contribute to an expansive scholarly debate about the nature of oneI had to read this book for my comprehensive exams (aka prelims). While the introductions to fascism in various countries were useful, what I really appreciated was the attempt to link various movements together into one group. What is 'fascism' if you try to define it beyond Italy? Can one speak of a generic version of fascism? What is fascism? The later chapters of this book go a long way to answering these questions, and thus contribute to an expansive scholarly debate about the nature of one of the most influential political movement (or movements) of the twentieth century....more

This book provides a great overview to all the fascist movements going during the time period. My only criticism is that I had the author as a professor, and reading his writing is sort of like listening to him lecture. But, if you are looking for an excellent resource book on fascism, and I know you are, this is your book!

Very detailed, but very dry in parts. And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't mind dry history books. You have to be really into this subject to enjoy this book. The author does know his stuff and I did learn quite a lot about the minor right-wing ultra-nationalist movements in Europe in the late 19th century.

A grand historical introduction, encompassing not just fascism, but all manner of authoritarian right-wing movements in not only Europe but abroad across a thirty-year span.

Payne recognizes that it is fruitless to search for a single 'cause' of fascism, nor can there be an exact model or set of entirely common characteristics. This is 'retrodictive' and comparative approach is, I think, much more realistic.

There are multiple contingent factors which catalyzed the development of fascism - the dA grand historical introduction, encompassing not just fascism, but all manner of authoritarian right-wing movements in not only Europe but abroad across a thirty-year span.

Payne recognizes that it is fruitless to search for a single 'cause' of fascism, nor can there be an exact model or set of entirely common characteristics. This is 'retrodictive' and comparative approach is, I think, much more realistic.

There are multiple contingent factors which catalyzed the development of fascism - the debates in art and culture over the rapid pace of industrialization and which continued through the first world war; in newly established countries with a fragmented party system; a danger, real or perceived, from the radical left; and willing conservative allies or supporters. Economic crises also were a major contribution - either from the great depression, industrialization, or both. Finally there had to be the question of national grievances, or a country feeling that its pride had been somehow sullied.

As a result, there are several distinct types. The Italian model, with multiple internal factions, the radical German type of national socialism, the traditional/Catholic Spanish model, and the mysticism seen in Iron Guard of Romania - whose modern relatives who look to such 'gurus' as Julius Evola. There are also studies of fascism on the fringe, where it took the form of minor political parties that never gained much power on their own, or only gained power because they were imposed by another conquering country.

Payne discerns that fascism was not an immediate 'regression' in the sense of reverting to a medieval world or one pre-Enlightenment. He also notes the hodgepodge nature of its economics, often promising a new unified state or a new form of politics, yet woefully unimaginative at best and atrocious at worst. In its many forms, it is a deformed and ultimately misguided approach to addressing the modern world.

In the 1990s, it may have been possible to wonder if fascism could make a return. Now?...more

Stanley Payne provides one of the most thorough and accurate overviews of Fascism in this book. The biggest problem with much of the fascist literature is that it combines fascism and Nazism into one category when in fact they are quite different. Payne grasps these nuances quite well and shows the nature and development of each. He tracks not only the rise of fascism in Italy but across Europe and the world. It looks at the failed movements in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe and the budding moveStanley Payne provides one of the most thorough and accurate overviews of Fascism in this book. The biggest problem with much of the fascist literature is that it combines fascism and Nazism into one category when in fact they are quite different. Payne grasps these nuances quite well and shows the nature and development of each. He tracks not only the rise of fascism in Italy but across Europe and the world. It looks at the failed movements in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe and the budding movements of the Middle East and the crushing defeats of fascism in Asia. The book is well written and thoroughly covered with an excellent bibliography for further study. All and all a great overview of fascism and one not to be missed. ...more

Thorough, readable, and fair. Payne is most strongly opinionated in his periodic anticommunist asides, but if their almost total irrelevance to the subject matter means they detract from the quality of the work a little, it also means that they can't detract from its quality to any great degree. Although he comes to no particularly interesting opinions himself, he represents those of others fairly well; and his is also the best comparative narrative history of fascist movements that I am aware oThorough, readable, and fair. Payne is most strongly opinionated in his periodic anticommunist asides, but if their almost total irrelevance to the subject matter means they detract from the quality of the work a little, it also means that they can't detract from its quality to any great degree. Although he comes to no particularly interesting opinions himself, he represents those of others fairly well; and his is also the best comparative narrative history of fascist movements that I am aware of. Ranks with Mann's "Fascists" and Paxton's "Anatomy of Fascism" as among the best general books on the subject....more

a bit dated now but quite enjoyable and it seems well researched. shows the variety of the national approaches to fascism rather well, each in their own historical and national context. The book does also a good job of explaining the diverse interpretations and approaches to understanding and explaining the emergence and the nature of fascism, making this a good historical entry-level read on the subject.

plus it's always fun to see how similar are the blood brothers of communism and fascism, ana bit dated now but quite enjoyable and it seems well researched. shows the variety of the national approaches to fascism rather well, each in their own historical and national context. The book does also a good job of explaining the diverse interpretations and approaches to understanding and explaining the emergence and the nature of fascism, making this a good historical entry-level read on the subject.

plus it's always fun to see how similar are the blood brothers of communism and fascism, and I like to point this out to leftists and watch them go berserk....more

Very detailed but rather bloodless. It covers the Nazis and Fascists in a detached way one might consider some remote historical movement. Sometimes distance is good but when covering Fascism a truly scary ideology I don't think it is best to approach it with too much equanimity. I like Paxton's treatment of Fascism I read a few days ago. It covers it in depth but doesn't let you forget tho horror and destructiveness of fascism. I recommend going there first.

This book did a good job of attempting to tackle a vast subject, but the author has absolutely no flow to his writing, and even the interesting parts of this book were unreadable. As I told people this semester: "Payne" didn't just describe the author, it was also an apt adjective for the book.

As a university history major this book definitely became one of my go too books during my time of thesis writing. Payne has the the wonderful ability to offer an in-depth history of fascism in such a manner that even those with little to no knowledge of what fascism is can understand what the author is writing about.

Payne provides an exhaustive review of the fascist phenomenon, largely in Europe, in the early years of the 20th Century. He not only chronicles the rise and fall of fascist movements but comprehensively analyzes what made a fascist movement and what did not. It can at times be rather dry reading but it's a valuable use of time.

Perhaps a little dated now (2014), but still a very detailed and perceptive analysis of historical fascism. Part II, dealing with interpretations of fascism, is still quite good for revealing the conceptual problems that exist in understanding this terrible political movement.

Stanley G. Payne is a historian of modern Spain and European Fascism at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He retired from full time teaching in 2004 and is currently Professor Emeritus at its Department of History.